US7305666B2 - Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure - Google Patents
Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US7305666B2 US7305666B2 US10/626,251 US62625103A US7305666B2 US 7305666 B2 US7305666 B2 US 7305666B2 US 62625103 A US62625103 A US 62625103A US 7305666 B2 US7305666 B2 US 7305666B2
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- software
- version
- core
- classes
- extensions
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Fee Related, expires
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F8/00—Arrangements for software engineering
- G06F8/70—Software maintenance or management
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F8/00—Arrangements for software engineering
- G06F8/40—Transformation of program code
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F9/00—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units
- G06F9/06—Arrangements for program control, e.g. control units using stored programs, i.e. using an internal store of processing equipment to receive or retain programs
- G06F9/44—Arrangements for executing specific programs
- G06F9/448—Execution paradigms, e.g. implementations of programming paradigms
- G06F9/4488—Object-oriented
Definitions
- the technical field relates to extensible software systems. More particularly, it relates to use of extensible classes.
- compiler programs were written to compile software written in a particular source code language and were targeted to a particular type of processor architecture (e.g., IA-64, X86, AMD, ARM etc.).
- processor architecture e.g., IA-64, X86, AMD, ARM etc.
- translator programs have been introduced that convert programs written in multiple source code languages to a single intermediate language representation (e.g., CIL (C++ Intermediate Language) and MSIL (Microsoft® Intermediate Language for .NET)).
- CIL C++ Intermediate Language
- MSIL Microsoft® Intermediate Language for .NET
- One suitable method for reducing the complexities of building compilers and other software development tools (e.g., analysis tools, optimizers) for multiple software development scenarios such as multiple languages and multiple targets is to develop an extensible core infrastructure or framework to which software extensions can be added to build specially configured compilers and other software development tools.
- JIT just-in-time
- his or her task may be made easier by generating the JIT compiler by reusing the code of a core compiler framework and adding extensions with code specific to the JIT compiler type scenario.
- JIT just-in-time
- an extensible compiler and tools framework that can be configured in multiple different ways to reflect multiple different software scenarios depending on languages, target architectures, and compiler types to be built (e.g., JIT, Pre-JIT, Native Optimizing Compiler etc.).
- One such complexity is related to defining data structures (e.g., object classes in a object-oriented language) of the core framework in a extensible manner such that extension fields dependent on multiple different software scenarios can be added to extend the data structures of the core framework.
- Traditional techniques of adding extension fields to a class definition can be used, but only at a hefty price paid for by reduced performance and increased code complexity, which can result in increased development and maintenance costs.
- class extensions dependent on various software development scenarios may be provided and added to extend core classes.
- Various class extensions may be combined to develop specially configured classes.
- classes of a core software program may be defined as either statically or dynamically extensible. If core classes are declared to be statically extensible, a header file combining the core class definitions and their corresponding class extensions may be generated and compiled together to generate an extended class. Such an extended class may be used to extend the core software program in a configuration dependent manner.
- header files comprising the core class declarations and separate files comprising extension declarations may be generated.
- the header files corresponding to the core classes and those corresponding to class extensions are then separately compiled to generate computer-executable files with links to each other such that the class extensions are added to extend the core classes at runtime.
- extension points may be provided within core class declarations to specifically indicate the point within the core class declarations where class extensions should be injected.
- An object description language with the appropriate syntax for defining extensible classes and class extensions is also described herein.
- pre-processor program capable of receiving input in an object description language and generating output in a source code representation to produce an extended version of the software program.
- the pre-processor is capable of generating output in any language that can eventually be compiled to a form executable by a computer.
- FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing an exemplary configuration dependent extensible core software framework.
- FIG. 2A is a block diagram illustrating data structures implemented as classes and objects in an exemplary object oriented programming language.
- FIG. 2B is a block diagram showing the relationship between classes of an extensible core software program and its corresponding extensions.
- FIG. 3A is a flow chart of an overall method for extending a class definition by adding class extensions.
- FIG. 3B is a flowchart of an overall method for generating a configuration dependent extended version of a core software program.
- FIG. 4A is a block diagram depicting an extended version of a core software framework, wherein the extension was implemented statically prior to compile time.
- FIG. 4B is a block diagram depicting an extended version of a core software program, wherein the extension was implemented dynamically at runtime.
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart of a method for statically extending a core software program.
- FIG. 6 is a block diagram depicting a system for statically extending a core software program as shown in FIG. 5 .
- FIG. 7 is a flow chart of a method for dynamically extending a core software program.
- FIG. 8 is a block diagram depicting a system for dynamically extending a core software program as shown in FIG. 7 .
- FIG. 9A is a listing of a core class declaration of a statically extensible core class in an object description language.
- FIG. 9B is a listing of two class extensions to the statically extensible core class declaration of FIG. 9A .
- FIG. 9C is a listing of a source code representation of an extended class declaration generated by associating the core class declaration of FIG. 9A with the class extensions of FIG. 9B .
- FIG. 10A is a listing of a core class declaration of a dynamically extensible core class in an object description language.
- FIG. 10B is a listing of an extension to the dynamically extensible core class declaration of FIG. 10A .
- FIG. 10C is a listing of a source code representation of an extended class declaration generated by associating the core class declaration of FIG. 10A with the class extension of FIG. 10B .
- FIG. 11A is a listing of a core class declaration indicating extension points for injecting class extensions.
- FIG. 11B is a listing of an extension to the core class definition of FIG. 11A .
- FIG. 12 is a block diagram illustrating exemplary implementation of constructing software development tools according to multiple software development scenarios.
- any of the technologies can be used in conjunction with other software development tools (e.g., debuggers, optimizers, disassemblers, simulators and software analysis tools).
- FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary core software framework that may be extended to build custom compilers and other software development tools of multiple different configurations to reflect multiple software development scenarios.
- the core 110 provides an extensible architecture that can be used as a building block to build customized software development tools 111 - 114 .
- the core 110 software can be extended by adding software extensions related to one or more software development scenarios.
- a JIT (Just-In-Time) compiler 111 targeting an IA-64 processor 121 may be built by providing software extensions to the core 110 .
- the fact that the compiler is a JIT compiler 111 and that is being targeted for a particular processor architecture (IA-64 processor at 121 ) may determine the form and content of the software extensions to the core 110 .
- software extensions related to the JIT compiler scenario and the IA-64 target scenario may be used to specify a configuration for building a customized software development tool.
- Other scenario factors such as the source languages 101 - 104 and the features of the tool that may be turned on or turned off based on particular software development scenarios may also add complexity to the task of building custom software development tools by extending a standard core framework such as the one in FIG. 1 .
- a software development scenario for a particular software development tool may include various processor architectures (e.g., IA-64, X86, AMD, ARM etc.) to which the tool will be targeted.
- software development scenarios may be related to a type of compilation being performed (e.g., JIT, Pre-JIT, Native Optimizing Compiler).
- Software development scenarios may also be related to other types functionality performed by the software development tool such as type of analysis, optimization, simulation, debugging, code generation etc.
- Yet another software development scenario may be related to a particular programming language (e.g., Java, C++, C# etc.) for which the software development tool may be specially configured.
- software development scenarios may also relate to whether the tool is to be used with a managed execution environment (e.g., Microsoft CLR's environment provided by the Microsoft .NET Framework) or not.
- a managed execution environment e.g., Microsoft CLR's environment provided by the Microsoft .NET Framework
- the above examples provide a limited set of software development scenarios or factors that may affect the choice of extensions needed to properly extend a core framework 110 .
- other scenarios can also influence the choice of software extensions needed to configure a custom software development tool.
- a collection of such scenarios may be referred to as a configuration.
- a particular configuration of a custom software development tool may be influenced by a single scenario.
- objects can be used to store data and access functionality for the data.
- Objects are defined by providing class definitions which may then be used to instantiate an object belonging to that class.
- FIG. 2A illustrates a class definition 201 for an exemplary type “bicycle” having variable or data members (e.g., or fields) 201 A-C and methods 202 A-C.
- a specific instance of a class 201 is an object 202 .
- the data members may describe the state of an object, whereas the methods are used to ascribe behaviors to the object.
- the variables 201 A-C are given specific values 202 A-C when an object 202 of class 201 is instantiated.
- Data members and methods are sometimes collectively referred to as “class members.”
- class definitions for an extensible core framework such as 110 may be provided to describe the data structures needed to implement the core 110 .
- the core classes may be changed or extended depending on such software development scenarios.
- One manner of extending a core software framework according to chosen software development scenarios is to extend the software classes.
- Software classes can be extended by changing the definitions of the object classes.
- Exemplary class extensions can include one or more class extension members (e.g., data members or methods).
- class extension members e.g., data members or methods.
- the class definition is modified to include the specified class extension members.
- core classes may be extended by having additional class members defined and incorporated into their core class definitions. These additional class members may be referred to as class extension members that extend the core classes. Collectively, such class extension members can be called a “class extension.”
- class extensions can vary greatly in a number of different ways. For example, certain class members required for some class extensions may not be required for others. Also, methods, functions and interfaces within a certain class extension may not be present at all in others, or, if they are present, may be defined differently. Such class extension members may relate to a software development scenario. For instance, the extra fields or class members to be added to a core class of a compiler framework to build a JIT compiler 111 may be far fewer than the number of fields or class members that may be required for a class extension related to a Native Optimizing Compiler 113 .
- class extensions can be specified to develop an extended version of a core software framework.
- Appropriate software e.g., a preprocessor or compiler
- class extensions for a particular software development scenario can be grouped into a software development scenario class extension set having one or more class extensions appropriate for the scenario.
- the software development scenario class extension set can be invoked to extend the appropriate classes when developing a software development tool.
- the classes can be extended during development or at run time.
- various software classes are used to implement the core 110 . If a developer specifies the software development scenarios of JIT compilation and IA-64 target architecture, the class extensions related to a JIT compiler and the class extensions related to an IA-64 target architecture are incorporated into core class definitions to extend the classes of a core framework 110 to be used in generating an extended version of core framework.
- FIG. 2B is a block diagram illustrating the relationship between core class definitions and their class extensions.
- the core node 210 may be related to a definition of a core class and is shown as having class members 1 and 2 .
- the extended class definition at 220 may be necessary for implementing particular software development scenarios, and it may add additional class members 3 and 4 through an extension 225 .
- Extended class definition 230 is the same as 220 and may be generated by adding the same additional class members 3 and 4 at extension 225 to the core class definition 210 .
- the extended class definition 260 is different and may be generated by adding additional class members 5 and 6 at extension 265 .
- extended class definitions 240 and 250 may be extended by adding extensions 245 , and 255 to the class definitions 220 and 230 , respectively.
- the extended class definitions 270 may be generated by adding extension 255 to the extended class definition 260 .
- class extensions are illustrated as having more than one class extension member.
- a class extension may have one or more class extension members, or it may replace one or more existing class members of the core class definition.
- a class extension may be in the form of a definition of a function of a method member found in the core class definition.
- extensions of class definitions for a core software development tool framework can be represented as shown in FIG. 2B with additional class extensions depending a compilation scenario (JIT, Pre-JIT, Native Optimizing Compiler etc.), language scenario (C#, Visual Basic etc.), target scenario (IA-64, X86, AMD, ARM etc.) and other variables that may influence a particular configuration of an extended version of the exemplary extensible software development tool framework of FIG. 1 .
- FIG. 2B depicts some simplified extension cases whereby the extended class definitions 220 , 230 , 240 and 250 inherit from previously defined classes in an orderly fashion without any single extension being used to extend multiple parent classes.
- this may not be the case when representing the extended class for a particular configuration of a software development tool that at various levels in class hierarchy may need to be extended in multiple different ways.
- extension 255 may be used to extend the class definition 230 as well as the class definition 260 .
- the same extension may be used to extend diverse parent classes.
- the relationship between the core class definitions and the definitions of the extended core classes can be programmed as a chain of inheritances between base classes and their sub-classes.
- such an approach tends to result in class bloat and can soon become burdensome to a programmer.
- the programmer has the task of not only manually developing the extension sub-classes but he or she also has the added task of destroying unused objects to manage the use of limited memory resources.
- Yet another manual approach to extending a base class definition may be the use of IF-DEF statements or other methods for implementing conditional compilation.
- the programmer may provide a base class definition and manually add IF-DEF statements or other conditional compilation statements including definition of extensions in their body to conditionally add the extensions to the base.
- This approach does have the advantage of extending classes only when needed, and thus, may be a better approach than generating a new sub-class for each extension, which can result in unwanted overhead.
- this approach is also manual in nature and requires a programmer to include IF-DEF statements in numerous locations for each possible configuration, causing the code to be littered with a multitude of such IF-DEF statements.
- FIG. 3A depicts an overall process for extending a core class definition for building a compiler or a tool by extending a core framework.
- FIG. 3B describes an overall process for building a compiler or a software development tool by using software scenario dependent extensions for extending a core framework.
- a simplified object definition language ODL
- ODL object definition language
- the configuration for a particular software development tool based on software development scenarios including its compiler type scenario, and the particular target scenario that it is being built for may be determined.
- the object description language may be used to define the extensions at 330 to represent the additional or different class extension members needed to extend the core class.
- the extension may be associated with a core class to appropriately extend the core class definition.
- the syntax for the object description language should provide for defining core classes as being extensible or not and further to associate a particular set of class extension members as extensions of a selected core class.
- An appropriate syntax for such a description language is described with examples further below.
- a pre-processor translation program may be used to translate the data or the object description language to source code of a programming language. After such pre-processing, at 350 , the extended class definition may be processed further and used to implement a compiler or other software development tools of a particular configuration by extending a core framework.
- each extension can simply extend the core or the base class as necessary without having to maintain any complex inheritance relationships.
- the programmers providing a particular extension of a core class need not be aware of the other extensions of the core class. This not only simplifies the task of defining the extensions, but also, the users of the extended core class need only be aware of core class names to use the extended core class. Thus, the programmers can be freed from the task of remembering complex hierarchical relationships among class definitions when using extended class definitions.
- One approach for extending a core framework program may be to obtain access to the source code files of the core program and to statically extend the core classes as needed by using the object description language to define the extensions, which may then be processed to generate the source code related to the extended classes.
- the extended classes may be generated by manually adding the extensions directly to the source code in a source code programming language.
- FIG. 4A illustrates this approach whereby the extensions 420 , 430 and 440 are added to the core framework file 410 in order to extend it and then the extensions 420 , 430 and 440 are compiled as part of the now extended core framework file 410 .
- this approach may not be suitable for all purposes because the programmers providing the definition of the extensions such as 420 , 430 and 440 will need to have access to the source code of the core framework 410 . This may not be desirable in circumstances where the providers of the core framework 410 wish to keep the core framework source code secret or unchanged.
- the second approach depicted in FIG. 4B may be used, whereby the core compiler and tools framework 450 is compiled as a separate file from the extensions 460 , 470 , and 480 .
- the extensions 460 , 470 and 480 and the core framework 450 may be adapted to have links to each other such that at runtime the extensions are linked to the core framework to appropriately extend the core framework.
- the links may be implemented as a simple linked list that specifies which extensions are to be used to extend particular core classes. This may also be achieved by using simple naming conventions that appropriately relate the extensions to the core classes as and when needed.
- this second approach may require additional overhead processing related to aspect of linking at runtime and thus, may be a slower implementation.
- this second approach does provide the flexibility of allowing the extending of a core class by developers not having access to the source code of the core framework.
- FIG. 5 illustrates a method for statically extending classes related to a core framework program prior to compile time as shown with reference to FIG. 4A above.
- the core classes and their extensions may be defined using an object description language.
- the definitions of the core classes and the class extensions need not be generated simultaneously or together. However, adding the class extensions would require some access to the source code of the core program.
- the definitions of the core classes and their extensions would together be processed by an ODL pre-processor which can translate an object description language representation to a source code representation.
- the result of the pre-processing by the ODL processor would be a header file and possibly some other code expressing the definitions of the core classes and their extensions in a source code language such C++.
- the header file with the extended class definitions comprising the core class members and the class extension members would then be compiled along with the rest of the code related to the now extended core framework to generate custom configured compilers and other software development tools.
- FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary system for implementing the process of FIG. 5 .
- multiple definitions of extensions 610 to core class definitions 620 can be stored as object description language files.
- An ODL pre-processor 630 may be provided which is capable of receiving the files 610 and 620 corresponding to the core class definitions and class extension definitions respectively.
- the pre-processor should also be capable of translating the files 610 and 620 from their object description language form to a source code representation 640 .
- the source code representation can be in any language that can be eventually compiled to a form executable by a computer processor.
- the source code 640 generated by the pre-processor 630 may include header files where class definitions are typically stored.
- a source code compiler 650 appropriate for the language of the source code 640 emitted by the pre-processor 630 may be provided for compiling the source code representation 640 to create customized extended versions of core software programs such as compliers and other software development tools.
- FIG. 7 illustrates a method for extending a core class definition of a extensible core framework software program by linking the extension to the appropriate core classes at runtime.
- the core class definitions and the extensions may be expressed separately using an object description language.
- the description language may be suitable for expressing that a core class definition is dynamically extensible.
- such a language may be suitable for expressing the associations between particular core class definitions and their extensions. Syntax for one such suitable language is described in further detail below.
- an ODL pre-processor may be used at 710 to translate the definitions in the object description language representation to a source code representation at 720 .
- the core class definitions are not processed by the ODL pre-processor together with the definition of their extensions. Instead, source code header files corresponding to core class definitions and source code header files corresponding to class extension definitions are generated separately. These may be generated by different ODL pre-processors but it is not necessary to do so. Furthermore, at 730 , the header files containing core class definitions and the header files containing the class extension definitions are compiled separately to create separate files that are executable by a computer. However, at 740 , during runtime, the class extension definitions may be linked to the appropriate core class definitions to extend the core classes as defined.
- FIG. 8 illustrates an exemplary system for implementing the process of FIG. 7 .
- the class extension definitions are provided in an object description language and stored in files 810 . It is not necessary that each class extension be stored as a separate file as shown.
- the core class definitions are also provided in an object description language and stored in files 820 .
- an ODL pre-processor 825 is provided for processing the core class definitions by translating the core class definitions from an object description language representation to a source code language representation to be stored as header file 835 .
- yet another ODL pre-processor 830 may be provided for processing the class extension files 810 to generate source code header files 840 comprising class extensions.
- a source code compiler 845 may be provided for compiling the class extension header files 840 to generate a computer executable file 860 containing the class extension definitions.
- a source compiler 850 may be provided for compiling the header files 835 containing the core class definitions to generate computer executable files 855 containing the core class definitions. Then at runtime, as the executable files corresponding to the core classes 855 and the executable files corresponding to class extensions are executed, the links 870 provided within the core and the extension classes can cause the core classes to be extended appropriately.
- a simple object description language can be used to provide class definitions that are dependent on the desired configuration of an extensible core framework program.
- the particular configuration of a core framework can place disparate demands on the class definitions based on software development scenarios such as the type of compiler (e.g., JIT, Pre-JIT, Native Optimizing etc.), type of target (e.g., IA-64, X86, ARM etc.) and other scenario factors.
- type of compiler e.g., JIT, Pre-JIT, Native Optimizing etc.
- type of target e.g., IA-64, X86, ARM etc.
- FIG. 9A depicts a standard class declaration using the object description language.
- the declaration 900 comprises a header 911 and a body 912 .
- the header may be used to declare the visibility of the class (e.g., public, private, etc.), the class name, etc.
- the header also comprises an attribute definition enclosed within square brackets as the following example:
- This declaration may be used to define the attributes of a class such as, whether it is a managed class (e.g., in a .NET scenario) or not and also, the extensibility attribute of the class. For example, defining whether it is a managed class may be done by declaring the [gc] attribute to indicate that the garbage collection for the objects of this class is automatically done (e.g., by the .NET framework).
- class extensibility attribute one approach is to assume that all classes are statically extensible as described above. Thus, no special attribute may be required to specifically declare that a class is statically extensible. However, as shown in FIG. 10A , a class that is to be extended at runtime (i.e. dynamically) may be declared with a specific attribute as such as [extensible].
- the class SYM is a statically extensible class with core class members 914 and 915 in its body.
- the class 900 may be a core class and the class members TYPE 914 and NAME 915 may be class members that are common to all configuration dependent extended classes that rely on the core class.
- class extensions for generating an extended version of the core class definition for particular configuration of a core framework may be provided.
- FIG. 9B shows two such class extension definitions 920 in an object description language.
- the extension 925 shows class members 926 related to a JIT compilation scenario for building a JIT compiler from a core framework.
- the JIT compilation scenario may need specific class members 926 such as interfaces, methods, and variables that are specific to the JIT compiler configuration but not necessarily so for other configurations.
- an extension 925 may be provided which, when processed by an ODL pre-processor, extends the core class definition of FIG. 9A .
- the keyword “extend” at 927 indicates that this is a static extension for the core class SYM.
- the attribute specification [JIT] 928 indicates that the extension is only to be applied when extending the core framework to implement a JIT compiler.
- the extension 930 may be provided for adding class members 931 specific to building a tool for targeting an IA-64 processor.
- the two extensions 925 and 930 are independent of each other and may be provided by different parties and the extensions need not rely on each other in any way as may be the case with extending core class definition using traditional class-subclass dependencies. Moreover, the programmers do not need to keep track of complex dependency relationships.
- the actual conditional implementation of the exemplary JIT compiler related extension 925 and the exemplary IA-64 target related extension 930 may be implemented when an ODL pre-processor generates a source code representation of the extended class definition as shown in FIG. 9C .
- the extended class 940 is shown not only having the original class members related to the core class definitions but it is now has the added class members 926 and 931 .
- the extended class as shown is a class definition for a configuration of a JIT compiler for targeting an IA-64 processor.
- multiple different extensions based on multiple different software development scenarios can be conditionally added on to statically extend a core class.
- the extended core class 940 when compiled using an appropriate source code compiler will help generate a customized version of the core framework.
- static extensions requires compiling the core framework and the extension together for generating one single file executable by a computer. This means those that are providing the extensions also need to have access to the source code of the core framework for recompiling it along with the extensions. To avoid this situation, which may not be desirable for a number of different reasons, extended class definitions may be generated at runtime.
- FIG. 10A depicts one example of a class declaration using the object description language (ODL) to dynamically extend a core class definition based on a particular configuration of an extended version of a core framework.
- the core class definition for a class INSTR 1010 has a header with an attribute “extensible” at 1011 for indicating that this is a dynamically extensible class declaration.
- the body of the class declaration 1012 has class members that are common to the framework. However, the attribute [extensible] at 1011 when processed by an ODL pre-processor generates and injects an extension object to the source code that can serve as a place holder for adding further class members to be provided later at runtime by an appropriately linked extension.
- FIG. 10B illustrates one such extension 1020 associated with a particular target scenario.
- extension 1020 adds the HINTBITS 1021 and PREDICATES 1022 class extension members particular to implementing a software development tool for a IA-64 target processor.
- the attribute [IA-64] 1023 is used to indicate that this particular extension is only applicable to a customized configuration of a core compiler and tools framework targeted for an IA-64 processor.
- the keyword 1024 “extends” is added to indicate that the extension 1020 is a dynamic extension of the class INSTR at 1025 .
- the core class definitions 1010 and the class extension definitions 1020 are processed to create separate source code representations of the core class definitions and their extensions. Also, these separate source code representations are later compiled separately to generate separate files executable by a computer.
- class extension members needed to extend a core class definition are not simply added to the source code header files with the extended class definitions. Instead, as shown in FIG. 10C , other code 1031 may be added to GET and SET class extensions that the dynamically extensible class definition expects to be added to the core class definition 1010 at runtime.
- the dynamic extensions may have the added overhead of having to execute some additional procedures 1031 in order to appropriately extend a class definition at runtime.
- the dynamic extensibility reduces the speed of a process but on the other hand provides for additional flexibility for providing extensions because in this approach the core and the extensions may be compiled separately. This allows for third parties to provide extensions to core class definitions without needing access to the source code of the core framework.
- FIG. 11A illustrates yet another example of a dynamically extensible core class definition 1110 .
- the keyword “extensible” 1111 indicates that this class INSTR is extensible and the body of the class also provides the class members for the class prior to adding any extensions.
- One of the class member methods 1112 has a keyword “extension point” which indicates that one of the class extensions is to be incorporated at the indicated extension point 1112 by specifically defining the method or interface FOO().
- FIG. 11B depicts a suitable dynamic extension 1120 for the extending the extensible class shown in FIG. 11A by providing not only the HINTBITS 1121 and PREDICATES 1122 class extension members needed for a configuration targeting an IA-64 processor but also the definition of the FOO() method 1123 indicated by the extension point 1112 .
- the “extension point” key word provides for a finer grain of control for indicating the specific points of the core class definitions where extensions may be injected into. Furthermore, this can be done in a simple manner by the use of object definition language which automatically generates the appropriate pointers to the appropriate extensions. Similarly, extension points may also be represented in a statically extensible core class definition.
- FIG. 12 illustrates an exemplary implementation of constructing software development tools according to multiple software development scenarios.
- a core class 1210 may be extended by adding class extensions related to various software development scenarios.
- the class extensions may be related to software development scenario of particular target architectures 1220 (e.g. X86, IA-64 etc.), and other extensions may be related to compilation scenarios 1230 (e.g., JIT, Native etc.). Similary, other software development scenarios may affect the choice of extensions.
- these various configurations of extensions can be added to extend a core class 1210 to build a software development tool 1250 using an extensible core framework.
- any of the technologies can use other software development tools (e.g., debuggers, optimizers, simulators and software analysis tools).
- the principles of generating extensions have been primarily described herein with reference to extending core classes, but the same principles are equally applicable to extend any extensions or sub-classes of a core class.
- the ODL processor is referred to above as being capable of receiving object description language and generating source code languages. The output of the ODL pre-processor however, need not be restricted just source code languages. It may also provide as output, intermediate representations or intermediate languages such as Microsoft.NET's CIL, or in any form executable by a processor.
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Software Systems (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Stored Programmes (AREA)
- Devices For Executing Special Programs (AREA)
Abstract
Description
Claims (33)
Priority Applications (10)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/626,251 US7305666B2 (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2003-07-23 | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure |
US10/628,054 US7707566B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2003-07-25 | Software development infrastructure |
JP2004178869A JP4841118B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2004-06-16 | Software development infrastructure |
EP04014358A EP1491999A3 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2004-06-18 | Software development infrastructure |
KR1020040048347A KR101150003B1 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2004-06-25 | Software development infrastructure |
CN200410085101XA CN1664779B (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2004-06-25 | Software development infrastructure |
JP2004194759A JP4716681B2 (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2004-06-30 | Method, system and recording medium for extending software |
EP04103108A EP1501010A3 (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2004-07-01 | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure |
KR1020040053552A KR101137126B1 (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2004-07-09 | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure |
CNB2004100589703A CN100478874C (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2004-07-23 | Method and system for enlarge and configuing corresponding extensible sofrware |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/626,251 US7305666B2 (en) | 2003-07-23 | 2003-07-23 | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/625,892 Continuation-In-Part US7146606B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2003-07-22 | General purpose intermediate representation of software for software development tools |
Related Child Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/610,692 Continuation-In-Part US7559050B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2003-06-30 | Generating software development tools via target architecture specification |
US10/628,054 Continuation-In-Part US7707566B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2003-07-25 | Software development infrastructure |
Publications (2)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20050022161A1 US20050022161A1 (en) | 2005-01-27 |
US7305666B2 true US7305666B2 (en) | 2007-12-04 |
Family
ID=33490900
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/626,251 Expired - Fee Related US7305666B2 (en) | 2003-06-26 | 2003-07-23 | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure |
Country Status (5)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US7305666B2 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1501010A3 (en) |
JP (1) | JP4716681B2 (en) |
KR (1) | KR101137126B1 (en) |
CN (1) | CN100478874C (en) |
Cited By (27)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20050246693A1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2005-11-03 | Plum Thomas S | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20060130021A1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2006-06-15 | Plum Thomas S | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20060212861A1 (en) * | 2005-03-18 | 2006-09-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Typed intermediate representation for object-oriented languages |
US20060242628A1 (en) * | 2003-06-27 | 2006-10-26 | Microsoft Corporation | An extensible type system for representing and checking consistency of program components during the process of compilation |
US20070283368A1 (en) * | 2006-06-02 | 2007-12-06 | Hiroshi Tsuji | Artifact management for an extensible runtime environment |
US20080077908A1 (en) * | 2001-02-28 | 2008-03-27 | Anders Bertelrud | Method and apparatus for application building using build styles |
US20080201721A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2008-08-21 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel programming interface |
US20090044196A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Method of using parallel processing constructs |
US20090044179A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US20090044180A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Device for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US20090044197A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Device for using parallel processing constructs |
US20090049435A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-19 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US20090132867A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-05-21 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for using parallel processing constructs |
US20090217249A1 (en) * | 2008-02-27 | 2009-08-27 | Taisong Kim | Compiling method and processor using the same |
US20090293045A1 (en) * | 2008-05-21 | 2009-11-26 | Optumsoft, Inc. | Dynamic collection attribute-based computer programming language methods |
US20100088686A1 (en) * | 2008-10-06 | 2010-04-08 | Microsoft Corporation | Programming language with extensible syntax |
US20100223603A1 (en) * | 2000-01-07 | 2010-09-02 | Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. | Multiple stage program recompiler using information flow determination |
US7818729B1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2010-10-19 | Thomas Plum | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20110191761A1 (en) * | 2010-02-04 | 2011-08-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Control Flow Analysis Using Deductive Reaching Definitions |
US8032865B2 (en) * | 2001-07-26 | 2011-10-04 | Kyocera Corporation | System and method for field diagnosis of wireless communications device system software |
US8161465B2 (en) * | 2006-07-27 | 2012-04-17 | Oracle International Corporation | Method and apparatus for performing conditional compilation |
US20120222021A1 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2012-08-30 | Kan Zhao | Method and System for presenting and analyzing software source code through intermediate representation |
US20130159981A1 (en) * | 2011-12-15 | 2013-06-20 | Sap Ag | Extension mechanism for scripting language compiler |
US20140189662A1 (en) * | 2012-12-31 | 2014-07-03 | Microsoft Corporation | Extending A Development Environment |
US9250937B1 (en) * | 2013-11-06 | 2016-02-02 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Code randomization for just-in-time compilers |
US10120661B2 (en) * | 2015-07-16 | 2018-11-06 | Sugarcrm Inc. | Multi-flavored software execution from a singular code base |
US10268455B2 (en) | 2016-05-20 | 2019-04-23 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Augmenting an original class with an augmenting class |
Families Citing this family (16)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7757224B2 (en) * | 2006-02-02 | 2010-07-13 | Microsoft Corporation | Software support for dynamically extensible processors |
US7743076B2 (en) * | 2007-01-26 | 2010-06-22 | Microsoft Corporation | Extensible action sequences coordinating independently created components |
US8762976B2 (en) * | 2007-03-09 | 2014-06-24 | Microsoft Corporation | Static extensibility models with dynamic languages and scripts |
US20090183185A1 (en) * | 2008-01-16 | 2009-07-16 | Microsoft Corporation | Declarative and Extensible Process Definition |
US8392895B2 (en) * | 2009-01-13 | 2013-03-05 | Mediatek Inc. | Firmware extension method and firmware builder |
CA2675680C (en) * | 2009-08-27 | 2013-05-14 | Ibm Canada Limited - Ibm Canada Limitee | Generating object code that uses calculated contents for a variable determined from a predicate |
US8572591B2 (en) * | 2010-06-15 | 2013-10-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Dynamic adaptive programming |
US9477447B1 (en) * | 2015-05-15 | 2016-10-25 | Sap Se | Semantic representations of software extensions |
US9542173B2 (en) * | 2015-05-15 | 2017-01-10 | Sap Se | Dependency handling for software extensions |
CN106484489A (en) * | 2015-09-01 | 2017-03-08 | 阿里巴巴集团控股有限公司 | A kind of method and device of extension programming language characteristic |
CN106909353B (en) * | 2015-12-22 | 2019-12-13 | 阿里巴巴集团控股有限公司 | Application program running method and device |
US10140105B2 (en) * | 2016-03-10 | 2018-11-27 | Wowza Media Systems, LLC | Converting source code |
GB2573775A (en) * | 2018-05-16 | 2019-11-20 | Sage Uk Ltd | Application Deployment |
US11366658B1 (en) * | 2021-01-19 | 2022-06-21 | Sap Se | Seamless lifecycle stability for extensible software features |
CN114296693A (en) * | 2021-12-15 | 2022-04-08 | 北京经纬恒润科技股份有限公司 | Model development method and device for multi-core heterogeneous processor |
US11995421B2 (en) | 2022-04-11 | 2024-05-28 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Register allocation heuristics order |
Citations (76)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4197978A (en) | 1978-06-29 | 1980-04-15 | The Boeing Company | Method of making an integral structural member |
US4734854A (en) | 1985-10-08 | 1988-03-29 | American Telephone And Telegraph Company | System for generating software source code components |
EP0463583A2 (en) | 1990-06-25 | 1992-01-02 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Architecture neutral distribution format (ANDF) compiler using an intermediate language |
US5355491A (en) | 1985-10-17 | 1994-10-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compiler including retargetable data generation |
EP0665493A2 (en) | 1994-01-28 | 1995-08-02 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | A typesafe framework for dynamically extensible objects |
US5488727A (en) | 1991-09-30 | 1996-01-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods to support multimethod function overloading with compile-time type checking |
US5598560A (en) | 1991-03-07 | 1997-01-28 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Tracking condition codes in translation code for different machine architectures |
EP0757313A1 (en) | 1995-08-01 | 1997-02-05 | Intergraph Corporation | System for adding attributes to an object at run time in an object oriented computer environment |
US5628016A (en) | 1994-06-15 | 1997-05-06 | Borland International, Inc. | Systems and methods and implementing exception handling using exception registration records stored in stack memory |
US5659753A (en) | 1991-02-27 | 1997-08-19 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Interface for symbol table construction in a multilanguage optimizing compiler |
US5742828A (en) | 1994-08-03 | 1998-04-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Compiler and method for evaluation of foreign syntax expressions in source code |
US5754858A (en) | 1996-05-01 | 1998-05-19 | Microsoft Corporation | Customizable application project generation process and system |
US5768595A (en) | 1993-10-29 | 1998-06-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for recompiling computer programs for enhanced optimization |
US5778233A (en) | 1996-10-11 | 1998-07-07 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for enabling global compiler optimizations in the presence of exception handlers within a computer program |
US5857105A (en) | 1997-02-05 | 1999-01-05 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Compiler for reducing number of indirect calls in an executable code |
US5918235A (en) | 1997-04-04 | 1999-06-29 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Object surrogate with active computation and probablistic counter |
US5937195A (en) | 1996-11-27 | 1999-08-10 | Hewlett-Packard Co | Global control flow treatment of predicated code |
US5943499A (en) | 1996-11-27 | 1999-08-24 | Hewlett-Packard Company | System and method for solving general global data flow predicated code problems |
US5966702A (en) | 1997-10-31 | 1999-10-12 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for pre-processing and packaging class files |
US5999739A (en) | 1997-05-29 | 1999-12-07 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method and apparatus for elimination of redundant branch instructions from a program |
US6009273A (en) | 1997-05-29 | 1999-12-28 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method for conversion of a variable argument routine to a fixed argument routine |
US6070011A (en) | 1997-10-21 | 2000-05-30 | Hewlett-Packard Co. | Compiler for performing a loop fusion, dependent upon loop peeling and/or loop reversal |
EP1049010A2 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2000-11-02 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for generating a platform-specific compiler |
US6148302A (en) | 1998-02-26 | 2000-11-14 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method, apparatus, system and computer program product for initializing a data structure at its first active use |
US6149318A (en) | 1997-04-15 | 2000-11-21 | Samuel C. Kendall | Link-time and run-time error detection, and program instrumentation |
US6182284B1 (en) | 1998-09-30 | 2001-01-30 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method and system for eliminating phi instruction resource interferences and redundant copy instructions from static-single-assignment-form computer code |
US6202204B1 (en) | 1998-03-11 | 2001-03-13 | Intel Corporation | Comprehensive redundant load elimination for architectures supporting control and data speculation |
US6212672B1 (en) * | 1997-03-07 | 2001-04-03 | Dynamics Research Corporation | Software development system with an executable working model in an interpretable intermediate modeling language |
US6247169B1 (en) | 1996-11-04 | 2001-06-12 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Structured exception-handling methods, apparatus, and computer program products |
US6249910B1 (en) | 1998-05-04 | 2001-06-19 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Apparatus and method for incrementally update static single assignment form for cloned variable name definitions |
US6253304B1 (en) | 1999-01-04 | 2001-06-26 | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | Collation of interrupt control devices |
WO2001048607A2 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2001-07-05 | Incert Software Corporation | Method for simulating back program execution from a traceback sequence |
US6289446B1 (en) | 1998-09-29 | 2001-09-11 | Axis Ab | Exception handling utilizing call instruction with context information |
US6292938B1 (en) | 1998-12-02 | 2001-09-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Retargeting optimized code by matching tree patterns in directed acyclic graphs |
US6330717B1 (en) * | 1998-03-27 | 2001-12-11 | Sony Corporation Of Japan | Process and system for developing an application program for a distributed adaptive run-time platform |
US6353924B1 (en) | 1999-02-08 | 2002-03-05 | Incert Software Corporation | Method for back tracing program execution |
US6363522B1 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2002-03-26 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for handling exceptions as normal control flow |
US6374368B1 (en) | 1999-05-21 | 2002-04-16 | Microsoft Corporation | Weakest precondition analysis |
US6412109B1 (en) | 1999-01-29 | 2002-06-25 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method for optimizing java bytecodes in the presence of try-catch blocks |
US20020083425A1 (en) | 2000-12-21 | 2002-06-27 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for obtaining scratch registers in computer executable binaries |
US6421667B1 (en) | 1996-06-11 | 2002-07-16 | Edgar F. Codd | Delta model processing logic representation and execution system |
US20020095667A1 (en) | 2000-09-27 | 2002-07-18 | Archambault Roch Georges | Optimizing compilation by forward store movement |
US6460178B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2002-10-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Shared library optimization for heterogeneous programs |
US6463581B1 (en) | 1996-10-03 | 2002-10-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for determining reachable methods in object-oriented applications that use class libraries |
US20020166115A1 (en) | 1999-06-10 | 2002-11-07 | A.V.S. Sastry | System and method for computer program compilation using scalar register promotion and static single assignment representation |
US6481008B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2002-11-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Instrumentation and optimization tools for heterogeneous programs |
US20020170044A1 (en) | 2001-02-23 | 2002-11-14 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and system for register allocation |
US6526570B1 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2003-02-25 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | File portability techniques |
US6560774B1 (en) | 1999-09-01 | 2003-05-06 | Microsoft Corporation | Verifier to check intermediate language |
US20030101335A1 (en) | 2001-11-26 | 2003-05-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Method for binary-level branch reversal on computer architectures supporting predicated execution |
US20030101380A1 (en) | 2001-11-29 | 2003-05-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and system for rewriting unwind data in the presence of exceptions |
US6578090B1 (en) | 1998-06-08 | 2003-06-10 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | System and method for interfacing two modules supporting various applications |
US6598220B1 (en) | 1999-12-17 | 2003-07-22 | Dell Products L.P. | System and method for allowing registerable runtime modification of object behaviors |
US6625808B1 (en) | 1999-12-10 | 2003-09-23 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and apparatus for facilitating memory management in a program comprised of heterogeneous components |
US6625804B1 (en) | 2000-07-06 | 2003-09-23 | Microsoft Corporation | Unified event programming model |
US6629312B1 (en) | 1999-08-20 | 2003-09-30 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Programmatic synthesis of a machine description for retargeting a compiler |
US6634023B1 (en) * | 1998-06-18 | 2003-10-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compile method, exception handling method and computer |
US20030217196A1 (en) | 2002-05-14 | 2003-11-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Software on demand system |
US20030217197A1 (en) | 2002-05-14 | 2003-11-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Preparation for software on demand system |
US20030226133A1 (en) | 2002-05-30 | 2003-12-04 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for improving a working set |
US6662356B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2003-12-09 | Microsoft Corporation | Application program interface for transforming heterogeneous programs |
US6678805B1 (en) | 2000-05-25 | 2004-01-13 | Microsoft Corporation | Structure organization for improved cache performance |
US20040025152A1 (en) | 2002-03-13 | 2004-02-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compiling method, apparatus, and program |
US20040049769A1 (en) | 2002-09-05 | 2004-03-11 | Guei-Yuan Lueh | Methods and apparatus for optimizing the operating speed and size of a computer program |
US20040093604A1 (en) | 2002-11-13 | 2004-05-13 | Demsey Seth M. | Method and system for accessing drawing resources |
US20040098731A1 (en) | 2002-11-19 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M | Native code exposing virtual machine managed object |
US20040095387A1 (en) | 2002-11-19 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M. | Virtualized and realized user interface controls |
US20040098710A1 (en) | 2002-11-14 | 2004-05-20 | Jim Radigan | Systems and methods to read, optimize, and verify byte codes for a multiplatform jit |
US20040098724A1 (en) | 2002-11-14 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M. | Associating a native resource with an application |
US6745383B1 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2004-06-01 | Veritas Operating Corporation | Early warning mechanism for enhancing enterprise availability |
US6748584B1 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2004-06-08 | Veritas Operating Corporation | Method for determining the degree to which changed code has been exercised |
US20040172639A1 (en) | 2003-02-28 | 2004-09-02 | Bea Systems, Inc. | Method for dynamically generating a wrapper |
US6981249B1 (en) | 2000-05-02 | 2005-12-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods for enhancing type reconstruction |
US7055132B2 (en) | 2002-06-28 | 2006-05-30 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for associating properties with objects |
US7117488B1 (en) | 2001-10-31 | 2006-10-03 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Safe computer code formats and methods for generating safe computer code |
US7120898B2 (en) * | 2003-06-26 | 2006-10-10 | Microsoft Corporation | Intermediate representation for multiple exception handling models |
Family Cites Families (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
JPS6488834A (en) * | 1987-09-30 | 1989-04-03 | Nec Corp | Program addition correcting system |
JPH04361328A (en) * | 1991-06-10 | 1992-12-14 | Fujitsu Ltd | Processing mode switching method |
JPH0683605A (en) * | 1992-09-07 | 1994-03-25 | Fujitsu Ltd | Data processing method to execute modified program |
-
2003
- 2003-07-23 US US10/626,251 patent/US7305666B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
-
2004
- 2004-06-30 JP JP2004194759A patent/JP4716681B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2004-07-01 EP EP04103108A patent/EP1501010A3/en not_active Ceased
- 2004-07-09 KR KR1020040053552A patent/KR101137126B1/en active IP Right Grant
- 2004-07-23 CN CNB2004100589703A patent/CN100478874C/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
Patent Citations (79)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4197978A (en) | 1978-06-29 | 1980-04-15 | The Boeing Company | Method of making an integral structural member |
US4734854A (en) | 1985-10-08 | 1988-03-29 | American Telephone And Telegraph Company | System for generating software source code components |
US5355491A (en) | 1985-10-17 | 1994-10-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compiler including retargetable data generation |
EP0463583A2 (en) | 1990-06-25 | 1992-01-02 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Architecture neutral distribution format (ANDF) compiler using an intermediate language |
US5339419A (en) | 1990-06-25 | 1994-08-16 | Hewlett-Packard Company | ANDF compiler using the HPcode-plus compiler intermediate language |
US5659753A (en) | 1991-02-27 | 1997-08-19 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Interface for symbol table construction in a multilanguage optimizing compiler |
US5598560A (en) | 1991-03-07 | 1997-01-28 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Tracking condition codes in translation code for different machine architectures |
US5488727A (en) | 1991-09-30 | 1996-01-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods to support multimethod function overloading with compile-time type checking |
US5696974A (en) | 1991-09-30 | 1997-12-09 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods to support multimethod function overloading with compile-time type checking |
US5768595A (en) | 1993-10-29 | 1998-06-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for recompiling computer programs for enhanced optimization |
EP0665493A2 (en) | 1994-01-28 | 1995-08-02 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | A typesafe framework for dynamically extensible objects |
US5628016A (en) | 1994-06-15 | 1997-05-06 | Borland International, Inc. | Systems and methods and implementing exception handling using exception registration records stored in stack memory |
US5742828A (en) | 1994-08-03 | 1998-04-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Compiler and method for evaluation of foreign syntax expressions in source code |
EP0757313A1 (en) | 1995-08-01 | 1997-02-05 | Intergraph Corporation | System for adding attributes to an object at run time in an object oriented computer environment |
US5754858A (en) | 1996-05-01 | 1998-05-19 | Microsoft Corporation | Customizable application project generation process and system |
US6421667B1 (en) | 1996-06-11 | 2002-07-16 | Edgar F. Codd | Delta model processing logic representation and execution system |
US6463581B1 (en) | 1996-10-03 | 2002-10-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for determining reachable methods in object-oriented applications that use class libraries |
US5778233A (en) | 1996-10-11 | 1998-07-07 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for enabling global compiler optimizations in the presence of exception handlers within a computer program |
US6247169B1 (en) | 1996-11-04 | 2001-06-12 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Structured exception-handling methods, apparatus, and computer program products |
US5943499A (en) | 1996-11-27 | 1999-08-24 | Hewlett-Packard Company | System and method for solving general global data flow predicated code problems |
US5937195A (en) | 1996-11-27 | 1999-08-10 | Hewlett-Packard Co | Global control flow treatment of predicated code |
US5857105A (en) | 1997-02-05 | 1999-01-05 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Compiler for reducing number of indirect calls in an executable code |
US6212672B1 (en) * | 1997-03-07 | 2001-04-03 | Dynamics Research Corporation | Software development system with an executable working model in an interpretable intermediate modeling language |
US5918235A (en) | 1997-04-04 | 1999-06-29 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Object surrogate with active computation and probablistic counter |
US6149318A (en) | 1997-04-15 | 2000-11-21 | Samuel C. Kendall | Link-time and run-time error detection, and program instrumentation |
US6009273A (en) | 1997-05-29 | 1999-12-28 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method for conversion of a variable argument routine to a fixed argument routine |
US5999739A (en) | 1997-05-29 | 1999-12-07 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method and apparatus for elimination of redundant branch instructions from a program |
US6070011A (en) | 1997-10-21 | 2000-05-30 | Hewlett-Packard Co. | Compiler for performing a loop fusion, dependent upon loop peeling and/or loop reversal |
US5966702A (en) | 1997-10-31 | 1999-10-12 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for pre-processing and packaging class files |
US6148302A (en) | 1998-02-26 | 2000-11-14 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method, apparatus, system and computer program product for initializing a data structure at its first active use |
US6202204B1 (en) | 1998-03-11 | 2001-03-13 | Intel Corporation | Comprehensive redundant load elimination for architectures supporting control and data speculation |
US6330717B1 (en) * | 1998-03-27 | 2001-12-11 | Sony Corporation Of Japan | Process and system for developing an application program for a distributed adaptive run-time platform |
US6249910B1 (en) | 1998-05-04 | 2001-06-19 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Apparatus and method for incrementally update static single assignment form for cloned variable name definitions |
US6578090B1 (en) | 1998-06-08 | 2003-06-10 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | System and method for interfacing two modules supporting various applications |
US6634023B1 (en) * | 1998-06-18 | 2003-10-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compile method, exception handling method and computer |
US6289446B1 (en) | 1998-09-29 | 2001-09-11 | Axis Ab | Exception handling utilizing call instruction with context information |
US6182284B1 (en) | 1998-09-30 | 2001-01-30 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Method and system for eliminating phi instruction resource interferences and redundant copy instructions from static-single-assignment-form computer code |
US6292938B1 (en) | 1998-12-02 | 2001-09-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Retargeting optimized code by matching tree patterns in directed acyclic graphs |
US6253304B1 (en) | 1999-01-04 | 2001-06-26 | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | Collation of interrupt control devices |
US6412109B1 (en) | 1999-01-29 | 2002-06-25 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method for optimizing java bytecodes in the presence of try-catch blocks |
US6353924B1 (en) | 1999-02-08 | 2002-03-05 | Incert Software Corporation | Method for back tracing program execution |
EP1049010A2 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2000-11-02 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for generating a platform-specific compiler |
US6363522B1 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2002-03-26 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for handling exceptions as normal control flow |
US6526570B1 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2003-02-25 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | File portability techniques |
US6286134B1 (en) | 1999-04-23 | 2001-09-04 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Instruction selection in a multi-platform environment |
US6374368B1 (en) | 1999-05-21 | 2002-04-16 | Microsoft Corporation | Weakest precondition analysis |
US20020166115A1 (en) | 1999-06-10 | 2002-11-07 | A.V.S. Sastry | System and method for computer program compilation using scalar register promotion and static single assignment representation |
US6481008B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2002-11-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Instrumentation and optimization tools for heterogeneous programs |
US6662356B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2003-12-09 | Microsoft Corporation | Application program interface for transforming heterogeneous programs |
US6460178B1 (en) | 1999-06-30 | 2002-10-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Shared library optimization for heterogeneous programs |
US6629312B1 (en) | 1999-08-20 | 2003-09-30 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Programmatic synthesis of a machine description for retargeting a compiler |
US6560774B1 (en) | 1999-09-01 | 2003-05-06 | Microsoft Corporation | Verifier to check intermediate language |
US6625808B1 (en) | 1999-12-10 | 2003-09-23 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and apparatus for facilitating memory management in a program comprised of heterogeneous components |
US6598220B1 (en) | 1999-12-17 | 2003-07-22 | Dell Products L.P. | System and method for allowing registerable runtime modification of object behaviors |
US6748584B1 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2004-06-08 | Veritas Operating Corporation | Method for determining the degree to which changed code has been exercised |
WO2001048607A2 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2001-07-05 | Incert Software Corporation | Method for simulating back program execution from a traceback sequence |
US6745383B1 (en) | 1999-12-29 | 2004-06-01 | Veritas Operating Corporation | Early warning mechanism for enhancing enterprise availability |
US6981249B1 (en) | 2000-05-02 | 2005-12-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods for enhancing type reconstruction |
US6678805B1 (en) | 2000-05-25 | 2004-01-13 | Microsoft Corporation | Structure organization for improved cache performance |
US6625804B1 (en) | 2000-07-06 | 2003-09-23 | Microsoft Corporation | Unified event programming model |
US20020095667A1 (en) | 2000-09-27 | 2002-07-18 | Archambault Roch Georges | Optimizing compilation by forward store movement |
US20020083425A1 (en) | 2000-12-21 | 2002-06-27 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for obtaining scratch registers in computer executable binaries |
US20020170044A1 (en) | 2001-02-23 | 2002-11-14 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and system for register allocation |
US7117488B1 (en) | 2001-10-31 | 2006-10-03 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Safe computer code formats and methods for generating safe computer code |
US20030101335A1 (en) | 2001-11-26 | 2003-05-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Method for binary-level branch reversal on computer architectures supporting predicated execution |
US20030101380A1 (en) | 2001-11-29 | 2003-05-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and system for rewriting unwind data in the presence of exceptions |
US20040025152A1 (en) | 2002-03-13 | 2004-02-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compiling method, apparatus, and program |
US20030217196A1 (en) | 2002-05-14 | 2003-11-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Software on demand system |
US20030217197A1 (en) | 2002-05-14 | 2003-11-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Preparation for software on demand system |
US20030226133A1 (en) | 2002-05-30 | 2003-12-04 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for improving a working set |
US7055132B2 (en) | 2002-06-28 | 2006-05-30 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for associating properties with objects |
US20040049769A1 (en) | 2002-09-05 | 2004-03-11 | Guei-Yuan Lueh | Methods and apparatus for optimizing the operating speed and size of a computer program |
US20040093604A1 (en) | 2002-11-13 | 2004-05-13 | Demsey Seth M. | Method and system for accessing drawing resources |
US20040098710A1 (en) | 2002-11-14 | 2004-05-20 | Jim Radigan | Systems and methods to read, optimize, and verify byte codes for a multiplatform jit |
US20040098724A1 (en) | 2002-11-14 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M. | Associating a native resource with an application |
US20040098731A1 (en) | 2002-11-19 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M | Native code exposing virtual machine managed object |
US20040095387A1 (en) | 2002-11-19 | 2004-05-20 | Demsey Seth M. | Virtualized and realized user interface controls |
US20040172639A1 (en) | 2003-02-28 | 2004-09-02 | Bea Systems, Inc. | Method for dynamically generating a wrapper |
US7120898B2 (en) * | 2003-06-26 | 2006-10-10 | Microsoft Corporation | Intermediate representation for multiple exception handling models |
Non-Patent Citations (99)
Title |
---|
"1.3 Compiler Architecture" http://lambda.uta.edu/cse5317/notes/node5.html visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-2. |
"A Parallelizing Compiler Framework" http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/promis/home.html visited on Jun. 4, 2003; pp. 1-2. |
"Attribute-Based Templates for Microsoft .NET", 2001, Newtelligence AG, 7 pages. |
"C/C++ Language Reference: try-except Statement," May 11, 2000, Microsoft Corp., accessed Jul. 10, 2005 at <http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vccelng/htm/key<SUB>-</SUB>s-z<SUB>-</SUB>4.asp>, 2 pages. |
"CIL: Infrastructure for C Program Analysis and Transformatio"; May 30, 2003; pp. 1-54. |
"Common Language Infrastructure (CLI), Partition I: Concepts and Architecture," ECMA TC39/TG3, Section 11.6, pp. 1-103, Oct. 2002. |
"Demystifying .NET Compilation" http://www.zdnet.com.au/printfriendly?AT=2000035027-20264543, pp. 1-4, including 1 page of "Figure A", Apr. 12, 2002. |
"Illinois-Irvine PROMIS Compiler Internal Representation" http://www.csrd.uiuc.ed/promis/ visited on Jun. 4, 2003; pp. 1-17. |
"Implementation of a Parallelizing Compiler with a Universal Intermediate Representations: Translating of Source Codes into Universal Intermediate Representations" http://www.ipsj.or.jp/members/SIGNotes/Eng/22/1997/017/article004.html visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-2. |
"Overview of the SA-C Compiler" http://www.cs.colostate.edu/Cameron/compiler.html visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-2. |
"PROMIS Implementation-The Illinois-Irvine PROMIS Team" http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/promis/ visited on Jun. 4, 2003; pp. 1-32. |
"PROMIS Release Announcement" http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/promis/release<SUB>-</SUB>announcement.html visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-3. |
"Scale Download"; Dept. of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst; http://www-ali.cs.umass.edu/Scale/download.html visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-13. |
"Scale"; Dept. of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst; http://www-ali,cs.umass.edu/Scale/ visited on May 20, 2003; pp. 1-46. |
"SMGN Reference Manual," http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.20-4/, pp. 1-3, May 2003. |
"Technical Overview" http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/promis/overview.html visited on Jun. 4, 2003; pp. 1-2. |
"The LEX & YACC Page," http://dinosaur.compilertools.net/, 4 pages, website visited on Jun. 16, 2003. |
"Zephyr Abstract Syntax Description Language (ASDL): Zephyr ASDL," http://web.archive.org/web/19991103153820/http://www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr/asdl.html, 1 page, Nov. 3, 1999. |
"Zephyr Compiler Infrastructure: Zephyr: Tools for a National Compiler Infrastructure," http://web.archive.org/web/20000817014546/http://www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr/, 1 page, Aug. 17, 2000. |
"Zephyr Computer Systems Description Languages (CSDL): Generating Machine-Dependent Compiler Parts Using CSDL," http://web.archive.org/web/20000829045324/www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr/csdl/, 1 page, Aug. 29, 2000. |
"Zephyr Register Transfer Lists (RTLs): Compiling with Register Transfer Lists (RTLs)," http://web.archive.org/web/20000829045407/http://www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr/rtl.html, 2 pages, Aug. 29, 2000. |
"Zephyr Very Portable Optimizer (vpo): Machine-Independent Optimization," http://web.archive.org/web/20010424131242/http://www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr/vpo/, 1 page, Apr. 24, 2001. |
Adl-Tabatabai et al., "Code Reuse in an Optimizing Compiler," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, vol. 31, Issue 10, pp. 51-68, Oct. 1996. |
Aigner et al., "An Overview of the SUIF2 Compiler Infrastructure," Technical Report, Computer Systems Laboratory, Stanford University and Portland Group, Inc., pp. 1-14, 2000. |
Aigner et al., "SUIF Compiler System: The SUIF Program Representation," Computer Systems Laboratory, Stanford University and The Portland Group, Inc., http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/suifguide/, pp. 1-30, Aug. 14, 2000. |
Alpern et al., "Detecting Equality of Variables in Programs" Proceedings of the 15<SUP>th </SUP>ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 1-11, 1988. |
ANDF Consortium, "ANDF Overview" http://web.archive.org/web/20021208181559/http://www.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/~andf/overview.htm, 2 pages (Dec. 8, 2002). |
Appel et al., "The Zephyr Compiler Infrastructure," Internal Report, http://www.cs.virginia.edu/zephyr, Princeton University and University of Virginia, pp. 1-10, Nov. 6, 1998. |
Arnold et al., "Exploring the Interaction between Java's Implicitly Thrown Exceptions and Instruction Scheduling", International Journal of Parallel Programming, vol. 29, Issue 2, Apr. 2001, pp. 111-137. |
Ayers et al., "Scalable Cross-Module Optimization," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1998 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, vol. 33, Issue 5, pp. 301-312, May 1998. |
Ayguadé et al.; "A Uniform Internal Representation for High-Level and Instruction-Level Transformations"; 1994; pp. 1-25. |
Bacon, "Fast and Effective Optimization of Statically Typed, Object-Oriented Languages", PhD thesis, Computer Science Division, University of California, Berkeley, 3 pages of introduction and pp. i-141, 1997. |
Benitez et al., "Target-Specific Global Code Improvement: Principles and Applications," Technical Report CS-94-92, Department of Computer Science, University of Virginia, pp. 1-14, 1994. |
Blickstein et al., "The GEM Optimizing Compiler System," Digital Technical Journal, vol. 4, No. 4, Special Issue, pp. 1-17, 1992. |
Bodik et al., "ABCD: Eliminating Array Bounds Checks on Demand", Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 321-333. |
Brooks et al., "Design of An Optimizing, Dynamically Retargetable Compiler for Common Lisp," Proceedings of the 1986 ACM Conference on LISP and functional programming, pp. 67-85, Aug. 1986. |
Burke et al., "The Jalapeño dynamic optimizing compiler for Java," Jun. 1999, Proceedings of the ACM 1999 conference on Java Grande, ISBN:1-58113-161-5, pp. 129-141. |
Cho et al.; "High-Level Information-An Approach for Integrating Front-End and Back-End Compiler"; Aug. 1998; pp. cover page and 1-19. |
Choi et al., "Efficient and precise modeling of exceptions for the analysis of Java programs," Sep. 1999, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, PASTE '99, vol. 24, Issue 5, ISSN:0163-5948, pp. 21-31. |
Colby et al., "A Certifying Compiler for Java", 2000 SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 95-107, Vancourver, Canada, Jun. 2000. |
Cytron, "Efficiently Computing Static Single Assignment Form and the Control Dependence Graph", ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, pp. 451-490, 1991. |
Dean et al., "Optimizations of Object-Oriented Programs Using Static Class Hierachy Analysis", European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pp. 77-101, 1995. |
Devanbu, "Re-targetability in Software Tools," ACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review, vol. 7, Issue 3, pp. 19-26, Sep. 1999. |
Engler, "VCODE: A Retargetable, Extensible, Very Fast Dynamic Code Generation System," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1996 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vol. 31, Issue 5, pp. 160-170, May 1996. |
Fitzgerald et al.; "Marmot: An Optimizing Compiler for Java"; Technical Report MSR-TR-99-33; Jun. 16, 1999; pp. cover p. and 1-29. |
Fitzgerald et al.; "The Case Profile-Directed Selection of Garbage Collectors"; 2000; pp. 1-10. |
Ganapathi et al., "Retargetable Compiler Code Generation," ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 14, Issue 4, pp. 573-592, Dec. 1982. |
Gay et al., "Fast Escape Analysis and Stack Allocation for Object-Based Programs", Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Compiler Construction, 12 pages, 2000. |
Goodenough, "Exception Handling: Issues and a Proposed Notation," Communications of the ACM, vol. 18, No. 12, pp. 683-696, Dec. 1975. |
Gosling "Java intermediate bytecodes," Mar. 1995, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, IR '95, vol. 30, Issue 3, ISSN:0362-1340, pp. 111-118. |
Guilan et al., "Retargetable Cross Compilation Techniques-Comparison and Analysis of GCC and Zephyr," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Technical Correspondence, vol. 37, Issue 6, pp. 38-44, Jun. 2002. |
Gupta et al., "Optimizing Java Programs in the Presence of Exceptions", 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science; vol. 1850, ISBN:3-540-67660-0, pp. 422-446. |
Gupta, "Optimizing Array Bound Checks Using Flow Analysis", ACM Letters on Programming Languages and Systems, pp. 135-150, 1993. |
Hamilton, "Technical correspondence: language integration in the common language runtime," ACM Press, Feb. 2003, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 19-28. |
Harper et al., "Compiling Polymorphism Using Intensional Type Analysis", ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 130-141, Jan. 1995. |
Hartoog et al., "Generation of Software Tools from Processor Descriptions for Hardware/Software Codesign," 1997 ACM. |
Hayes et al., "Component Design of Retargetable Program Analysis Tools that Reuse Intermediate Representations," Proceedings of the 22<SUP>nd </SUP>International Conference on Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, ACM, pp. 356-365, Jun. 2000. |
Heine et al., "Interprocedural Program Analyses," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., 22 pages, http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/tutorial/analysis.ppt, Jun. 2000. |
Heine, "An Overview of the SUIF2 Base Infrastructure," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., 30 pages, http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/tutorial/basesuif.ppt, Jun. 2000. |
Hennessy "Program optimization and exception handling," Jan. 1981, Proceedings of the 8<SUP>th </SUP>ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, ISBN:0-89791-029-X, pp. 200-206. |
Holzle et al., "OSUIF: SUIF For Objects," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., pp. 1-17, http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/ tutorial/osuif-intro.ps, Jun. 2000. |
International Search Report, Sep. 1, 2005, PCT/US04/15965, 13 pages. |
Johnson et al.; "Dependence-Based Program Analysis"; ACM SIGPLAN'93 PLDI, Jun. 1993; pp. 1-12. |
Kessler et al., "EPIC-A Retargetable, Highly Optimizing Lisp Compiler," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Proceedings of the 1986 SIGPLAN Symposium on Compiler Construction, vol. 21, Issue 7, pp. 118-130, Jul. 1986. |
Khedker et al., "Bidirectional Data Flow Analysis: Myths and Reality," ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 47-57, Jun. 1999. |
Kienle, "A SUIF Java Compiler," Aug. 1998, University of California Santa Barbara, Technical Report TRCS98-18, Section 5.9, 6.9, 8.3, and 9.2.15. |
Kienle, "OSUIF: A Closer Look," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., pp. 1-31, http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/ tutorial/osuif-details.ps, Jun. 2000. |
Knoop et al., "Lazy Code Motion," In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '92 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, San Francisco, CA, 11 pages, Jun. 1992. |
Knoop et al., "Partial Dead Code Elimination," In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '94 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, 12 pages, Jun. 1994. |
LAM, "An Overview of the SUIF2 System," ACM SIGPLAN '99 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Atlanta GA, 20 pages, http:suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4/ tutorial/suif-intro.ppt, May 4, 1999. |
Larus; "Whole Program Paths"; Proceedings of the SIGNPLAN'99 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 99), May 1999; pp. 1-11. |
Lengauer et al, "A Fast Algorithm for Finding Dominators in a Flowgraph", ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, pp. 121-141, 1979. |
LIM, "Affine Partitioning for Parallelism & Locality," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., 16 pages, http://suif.stanford.edu/suif/suif2/doc-2.2.0-4 tutorial/affine.ppt, Jun. 2000. |
Litwak, "PURE Java(TM) 2," Dec. 1999, Sams Publishing, ISBN:0-672-31654-4, Chapter 10. |
Morel et al., "Global Optimization by Suppression of Partial Redundancies," Communications of the ACM, vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 96-103, Feb. 1979. |
Morrisett et al., "Stack-Based Typed Assembly Language", Xavier Leroy and Atsushi Ohori, editors, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1473, pp. 28-52, Mar. 1998. |
Mueller et al., "Avoiding Unconditional Jumps by Code Replications", Proceedings of the SIGPLAN '92 Conference on Programming Language Design and iMplementation, pp. 322-330, Jun. 1992. |
NECULA, "Compiling With Proofs", PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 27 pages, Sep. 1998. |
Okasaki et al.; "Call-by-Need and Continuation-passing Style"; Lisp and Symbolic Computation: An International Journal; Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993; pp. 1-25. |
Polychronopoulos et al.; "The Promis Compiler Project-Annual Report"; Oct. 1, 1997; pp. 1-15. |
Ramsey and Jones, "A single intermediate language that supports multiple implementations of exceptions," May 2000, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, PLDI 2000, vol. 35, Issue 5, ISBN:1-58113-199-2, pp. 285-298. |
Ramsey et al., "Machine Descriptions to Build Tools for Embedded Systems," Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Languages Compilers, and Tools for Embedded Systems, 17 pages, 1998. |
Robillard et al., "Analyzing exception flow in Java programs," Oct. 1999, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, ESEC/FSE-7, vol. 24, Issue 6, ISBN:3-540-66538-2, pp. 322-337. |
Ruf, "Effective Synchronization Removal for Java", ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 208-218, BC, Canada, 2000. |
Saito et al.; "PROMIS IR Design"; Sep. 29, 1997; pp. 1-4. |
Saito et al.; "PROMIS IR Implementation-AST Components-"; Sep. 29, 1997; pp. 1-4. |
Smith, "Machine SUIF," ACM SIGPLAN 2000 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Vancouver, B.C., 15 pages, Jun. 2000. |
Stallman, "Using and Porting the GNU Compiler Collection," 504 pages, http://www.skyfree.org/linux/references/gcc-v3.pdf, Jul. 28, 1999. |
Sun Microsystems, Inc., "The Java Language Environment: 6-Security in Java, 6.3 The Byte Code Verification Process" http://web.archive.org/web/19990302092957/http://java.sun.com/docs/white/langenv/Security.doc3.html, 3 pages (Mar. 2, 1999). |
Tarditi et al., "TIL: A Type-Directed Optimizing Compiler for ML", 1996 SIGNPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 181-192, May 1996. |
Tarditi et al.; "No Assembly Required: Compiling Standard ML to C"; Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990; pp. 1-16. |
Tarditi, "Design and Implementation of Code Optimizations for a Type-Directed Compiler for Standard ML", PhD Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 6 pages of introduction and pp. i-266, Dec. 1996 (Available as Technical Report CMU-CS-97-108). |
Tarjan, "Testing Flow Graph Reducibility", Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 96-107, 1973. |
Vitek et al., "Efficient Type Inclusion Tests", Proceedings of OOPSLA '97, pp. 142-157, Atlanta, Georgia, 1997. |
Weaver et al.; "Score: A Compiler Representation for Heterogeneous Systems"; Dec. 1995; pp. 1-14. |
Wegbreit, "Property Extraction in Well-Founded Property Sets," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 1, No. 3, pages 270-285, Sept. 1975. |
Woo et al., "Alias analysis for exceptions in Java," Jan. 2002, Australian Computer Science Communications, ACSC2002, vol. 24, Issue 1, ISBN-ISSN:1445-1336, 0-909925-82-8, pp. 321-329. |
X/Open Company Ltd., "X/Open Preliminary Specification, Architecture Neutral Distribution Format (XANDF)" pp. 1-10 (X/Open Company Ltd. 1996). |
Yellin, "Low Level Security in Java" http://web.archive.org/web/19990117003400/http://java.sun.com/sfaq/verifier.html 13 pages (Jan. 17, 1999). |
Cited By (50)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8365151B2 (en) * | 2000-01-07 | 2013-01-29 | Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. | Multiple stage program recompiler using information flow determination |
US20100223603A1 (en) * | 2000-01-07 | 2010-09-02 | Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. | Multiple stage program recompiler using information flow determination |
US20080077908A1 (en) * | 2001-02-28 | 2008-03-27 | Anders Bertelrud | Method and apparatus for application building using build styles |
US8010937B2 (en) * | 2001-02-28 | 2011-08-30 | Apple Inc. | Method and apparatus for application building using build styles |
US8527937B2 (en) | 2001-02-28 | 2013-09-03 | Apple Inc. | Method and apparatus for application building using build styles |
US8032865B2 (en) * | 2001-07-26 | 2011-10-04 | Kyocera Corporation | System and method for field diagnosis of wireless communications device system software |
US20060242628A1 (en) * | 2003-06-27 | 2006-10-26 | Microsoft Corporation | An extensible type system for representing and checking consistency of program components during the process of compilation |
US7810080B2 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2010-10-05 | Thomas Plum | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US7818729B1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2010-10-19 | Thomas Plum | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20060130021A1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2006-06-15 | Plum Thomas S | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20050246693A1 (en) * | 2003-09-15 | 2005-11-03 | Plum Thomas S | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US7856624B2 (en) | 2003-09-15 | 2010-12-21 | Thomas Plum | Automated safe secure techniques for eliminating undefined behavior in computer software |
US20060212861A1 (en) * | 2005-03-18 | 2006-09-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Typed intermediate representation for object-oriented languages |
US7512938B2 (en) * | 2005-03-18 | 2009-03-31 | Microsoft Corporation | Typed intermediate representation for object-oriented languages |
US20070283368A1 (en) * | 2006-06-02 | 2007-12-06 | Hiroshi Tsuji | Artifact management for an extensible runtime environment |
US7844978B2 (en) * | 2006-06-02 | 2010-11-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Artifact management for an extensible runtime environment |
US8161465B2 (en) * | 2006-07-27 | 2012-04-17 | Oracle International Corporation | Method and apparatus for performing conditional compilation |
US20090049435A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-19 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US20090044196A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Method of using parallel processing constructs |
US8707281B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2014-04-22 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US8707280B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2014-04-22 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Using parallel processing constructs and dynamically allocating program portions |
US20090132867A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-05-21 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for using parallel processing constructs |
US20080201721A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2008-08-21 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel programming interface |
US20090044197A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Device for using parallel processing constructs |
US8010954B2 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2011-08-30 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel programming interface to dynamically allocate program portions |
US20090044180A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Device for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US20090044179A1 (en) * | 2007-02-14 | 2009-02-12 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US8239844B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-07 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Method of using parallel processing constructs and dynamically allocating program portions |
US8239846B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-07 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Device for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US8239845B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-07 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for using parallel processing constructs |
US8250550B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-21 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel processing of distributed arrays and optimum data distribution |
US8255890B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-28 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Media for performing parallel processing of distributed arrays |
US8255889B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2012-08-28 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Method of using parallel processing constructs and dynamically allocating program portions |
US8527973B2 (en) | 2007-02-14 | 2013-09-03 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Parallel programming interface to dynamicaly allocate program portions |
US20120222021A1 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2012-08-30 | Kan Zhao | Method and System for presenting and analyzing software source code through intermediate representation |
US8719805B2 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2014-05-06 | Kan Zhao | Method and system for presenting and analyzing software source code through intermediate representation |
US20090217249A1 (en) * | 2008-02-27 | 2009-08-27 | Taisong Kim | Compiling method and processor using the same |
US8752031B2 (en) * | 2008-02-27 | 2014-06-10 | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Compiling method and processor using the same |
US9158519B2 (en) | 2008-05-21 | 2015-10-13 | Optumsoft, Inc. | Dynamic collection attribute-based computer programming language methods |
US20090293045A1 (en) * | 2008-05-21 | 2009-11-26 | Optumsoft, Inc. | Dynamic collection attribute-based computer programming language methods |
US20100088686A1 (en) * | 2008-10-06 | 2010-04-08 | Microsoft Corporation | Programming language with extensible syntax |
US8615748B2 (en) | 2010-02-04 | 2013-12-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Control flow analysis using deductive reaching definitions |
US20110191761A1 (en) * | 2010-02-04 | 2011-08-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Control Flow Analysis Using Deductive Reaching Definitions |
US20130159981A1 (en) * | 2011-12-15 | 2013-06-20 | Sap Ag | Extension mechanism for scripting language compiler |
US8997070B2 (en) * | 2011-12-15 | 2015-03-31 | Sap Se | Extension mechanism for scripting language compiler |
US20140189662A1 (en) * | 2012-12-31 | 2014-07-03 | Microsoft Corporation | Extending A Development Environment |
US8954939B2 (en) * | 2012-12-31 | 2015-02-10 | Microsoft Corporation | Extending a development environment |
US9250937B1 (en) * | 2013-11-06 | 2016-02-02 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Code randomization for just-in-time compilers |
US10120661B2 (en) * | 2015-07-16 | 2018-11-06 | Sugarcrm Inc. | Multi-flavored software execution from a singular code base |
US10268455B2 (en) | 2016-05-20 | 2019-04-23 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Augmenting an original class with an augmenting class |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
JP2005044347A (en) | 2005-02-17 |
EP1501010A3 (en) | 2007-09-12 |
KR20050011685A (en) | 2005-01-29 |
CN100478874C (en) | 2009-04-15 |
CN1577265A (en) | 2005-02-09 |
KR101137126B1 (en) | 2012-04-19 |
EP1501010A2 (en) | 2005-01-26 |
US20050022161A1 (en) | 2005-01-27 |
JP4716681B2 (en) | 2011-07-06 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US7305666B2 (en) | Description language for an extensible compiler and tools infrastructure | |
JP4841118B2 (en) | Software development infrastructure | |
US7380242B2 (en) | Compiler and software product for compiling intermediate language bytecodes into Java bytecodes | |
JP5851396B2 (en) | Processing method | |
Gasiunas et al. | EScala: modular event-driven object interactions in Scala | |
EP1074911A2 (en) | Aspect-oriented programming | |
EP1639461A2 (en) | An extensible type system for representing and checking consistency of program components during the process of compilation | |
Pawlak et al. | Spoon: Program analysis and transformation in java | |
Spinczyk et al. | Advances in AOP with AspectC++. | |
Tilevich et al. | Binary refactoring: Improving code behind the scenes | |
Poletto et al. | tcc: A templatebased compiler for ‘c | |
Mateos et al. | An approach for non-intrusively adding malleable fork/join parallelism into ordinary JavaBean compliant applications | |
Bancila et al. | Learn C# Programming: A guide to building a solid foundation in C# language for writing efficient programs | |
Dümmel et al. | MuLE: A Multiparadigm Language for Education. The Object-Oriented Part of the Language | |
Forgáč et al. | Static and dynamic approaches to weaving | |
Troelsen et al. | Understanding CIL and the role of dynamic assemblies | |
Wu et al. | Shadow programming: Reasoning about programs using lexical join point information | |
Savidis | Translating declarative control elements to imperative using'l-value redefinition graphs' | |
Bettini | A Java package for class and mixin mobility in a distributed setting | |
Ishimura et al. | Aspect-oriented Programming with Julia | |
Lukeš | API for C# code generation | |
dos Santos | Metaobject Protocols for Julia | |
Singer | The Command Dispatcher | |
Philippsen et al. | Complex numbers for Java | |
Almajali et al. | Benefits and challenges of a class-based design for dynamic aspects in DAC++ |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: MICROSOFT CORPORATION, WASHINGTON Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:BURGER, JULIAN;TARDITI, DAVID READ, JR.;MITCHELL, CHARLES L.;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:014320/0277 Effective date: 20030722 |
|
STCF | Information on status: patent grant |
Free format text: PATENTED CASE |
|
FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: PAYOR NUMBER ASSIGNED (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: ASPN); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY |
|
FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 4 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC, WASHINGTON Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:MICROSOFT CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:034541/0477 Effective date: 20141014 |
|
FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 8 |
|
FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: MAINTENANCE FEE REMINDER MAILED (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: REM.); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY |
|
LAPS | Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees |
Free format text: PATENT EXPIRED FOR FAILURE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: EXP.); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY |
|
STCH | Information on status: patent discontinuation |
Free format text: PATENT EXPIRED DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEES UNDER 37 CFR 1.362 |
|
FP | Lapsed due to failure to pay maintenance fee |
Effective date: 20191204 |